Wednesday, March 9, 2016

Political Brainwashing

Political
language... is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and
to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.

George Orwell

Do people think for themselves? Are you yourself completely
logical and sensible in the way you select from available choices? When you
vote, do you have a firm mindset that directs your choice?

Big money is being spent to manipulate and control how
people think and vote in the ongoing American elections. Let’s examine how bias
can be influenced.

Bias

Bias is a predisposition to hold a limited perspective, with
refusal to consider the merits of alternative points of view. People develop
biases towards or against individuals, ethnic groups, religions, social classes,
and political parties. Everyone’s mind is controlled since birth, when biases are
developed. (1)

It’s almost impossible
for anyone to be immune to bias. Intelligent, rational, patriotic, reasonable
people can disagree strongly, sometimes even violently, each insisting that the
other side is unreasonable, unpatriotic, misguided – and even stupid.

Being raised in a specific country, as part of a particular
family and home and in a certain time period means being biased in favor of
accepted and familiar thinking.

Political psychology researchers study voters' biases to
understand how they can be influenced. Factors such as gender, race, culture or
religions are considered, to allow adaptation of the candidates’ political
message for the best results. Some parts of the message may be changed to
maximize their voting results.

In a country like America, with a huge diversity of class,
religion and ethnicity in different states and regions, what the politicians
actually say they believe is often irrelevant – they adjust their messages to
generate the most votes.

Prejudice

Prejudice is prejudgment
– forming an opinion before becoming aware of all relevant facts. The word is
often used to refer to preconceived, usually unfavorable, judgments toward
people because of gender, political opinion, social class, age, disability,
religion, sexuality, race/ethnicity, language, nationality, or other personal
characteristics. In most developed countries today, it is not socially or politically
acceptable to be prejudiced.

In the seven years since the United States elected the
country’s first black president, a majority of Americans still feel prejudiced against
blacks. According to a 2012 Associated Press survey, 51% percent of Americans
explicitly express anti-black prejudice, up from 48 % in 2008.And yet, not a single politician admits to
being prejudiced – that would amount to political suicide. (2)

Most prejudice cannot easily be over-ridden. One intelligent
and sincere friend told me, "I was born and brought up to believe that
Blacks were like vermin. Now I have to consciously over-ride my own instinctive
prejudice." It’s hard to imagine how any deeply prejudiced individual
feels about having a black President? (3)

Advertising

More than 60 years ago, in his non-fiction bestseller The Hidden Persuaders (1957) Vance
Packard described real-life influence that was rapidly emerging, that was
perhaps more threatening. US businesses and politicians were using subtle ways to
change people’s thinking, emotions and behavior based on insights from
psychiatry and the social sciences. (4)

The forces that Packard described have become more pervasive
over the decades. Soothing music in shopping malls causes people to relax, walk
more slowly and buy more things, whether they need it or not. Highly skilled
marketing professionals orchestrate the vacuous thoughts and feelings that
teenagers experience via their handheld smartphones.

Most people are unaware of the deceptive subliminal
advertising that is widely used today. Subliminal messages can be found in
every major advertisement and magazine cover. Advertisers tap into
vulnerabilities to manipulate and control. Fake news and propaganda are in wide
use throughout the world by politicians, businesses and even governments.

Mind Control &
Brainwashing

Brainwashing means using overt obvious means to control how
victims think and behave, which (5) might involve loud noise, sleep deprivation and
similar tactics. It may also mean controlling environments with music, demanding
voice tones, rituals and repeated phrases, peer pressure in the form of disapproval,
public humiliation, harsh rebukes, warnings, and elements of fear and guilt.

Mind control is subtler. It usually involves positive social reinforcement like
fellowshipping, smiling, compliments, treats, pats on the back, an unspoken
feeling of community, and appreciation. (6)

The concept of mind control is a major premise in the criticism
of modern corporate culture and politics. Many politicians use repetitive
advertising, with exaggerated claims that sometimes are outright lies; when repeated
often they are accepted as the truth. There is very little that the opposing
candidate can do other than protest, and the falsehood is buried in the
cacophony of debate. (7)

Social Media in
Politics

The ability to publish content and broadcast it to millions
of people instantly allows political campaigns to manage their candidates’
images based on rich sets of analytics in real time and at almost no cost. At
the same time, social media has made elected officials and candidates more
accountable and accessible to voters.

Twitter and Facebook have become instrumental in organizing
campaigns. They allow like-minded voters and activists to easily share news and
information such as campaign events with each other. They can simply Share on Facebook and retweet on Twitter.

Political campaigns can tap into a wealth of information or
analytics about the people who are following them on social media, and
customize their messages based on selected demographics. Campaigns may send
different messages to differing sets of voters to maximize effectiveness. (8)

Some campaigns raise large amounts of cash in short period
of time using social media such as Twitter and Facebook to get the word out. In
the current election, Bernie Sanders is raising more money from small donors
via email and Twitter messages to growing groups of followers. Indeed, he makes
significant gains among young people through his e-campaigns, with renewed
calls to donate again every time he wins.

In the new political environment, social media has helped
raise more money than the traditional Super-PAC. TV advertising is still the
largest line item in political campaigns, and will remain so through 2016 and
beyond. But this is being changed by access to new data about viewership, and
spending on digital formats is growing rapidly.

Tech Control

Today there are a small number of high-tech companies which
have the ability to monitor much of our activity, and invisibly control more
and more of what we think, feel, do and say. The technology that now surrounds
us has made possible undetectable and untraceable manipulations of entire
populations – exploitations that have no precedent in human history and that
are currently well beyond the scope of existing regulations and laws. The new
hidden persuaders are better, bigger and bolder than anything Vance Packard
ever envisioned.

The Google search engine
is so popular that the name is now a commonly used verb in many languages. The ordered
list of Google search results is so good that about 50% of clicks go to the top
two items, and more than 90% go to the 10 items listed on the first page of
results. The point is that Google decides which of the billions of web pages will
be included in search results and how they will be ranked. The algorithms that
decide are one of the best-kept secrets in the world (like the formula for
Coca-Cola). (9)

If Google wished to fix an election, it could dip into its
massive database of personal information to identify undecided voters. Then it
could publish regular customized rankings favoring one candidate. Who would
know?

Apple has total control over what users can touch and view
in billions of cellphones. The algorithms of access and control have features that
they refuse to adapt or modify, even when demanded by governments. The same freedoms
apply to any technology company that controls millions, or even billions, of
worldwide users.

Future Possibilities

Where is mind-control
heading next? In his 1932 novel, Brave
New World Aldous Huxley pictured a society in which unhappiness and
aggression had been engineered out through a combination of genetic engineering
and psychological conditioning.

George Orwell’s 1984 (published in 1949) described a society
in which thought itself was controlled – children were taught to use the
language Newspeak to assure that they could never express ideas that were
dangerous to society.

Some think that in a future global democracy, or
cyberocracy, governments will rule by the effective use of information. (10)

Let’s Engage

Please provide your own feedback, comments and suggestions.
Share our discussion by responding to these questions directly via the blog. If
you prefer, send me an email and I’ll insert your comments.

Are you engaged with the
latest political campaigns and debates?

Are you satisfied with how
political campaigns are operating?

Do you think politicians
lie? Does that offend you?

What is your view of
campaign funding? Is Super-PAC funding acceptable?

Have you contributed to
any politician online?

Do you watch political
advertising on TV? How does it affect your opinions?

Are you engaged with
social media for politics? How does it affect your view?

12 comments:

Even as a teen, I can recall being puzzled when trying to parse what any politician was saying. They string words and abstractions together that can plausibly say whatever you'd like to think it means. It's a lot like art that involves the viewer.

Pardon my bluntness, but in a classical sense, that's a cop-out. It's not art. It doesn't say anything. It is noise.

Our society is filled with noise that carries virtually no information, but looks as though it does. It's like those bogus three dimensional drawings that, upon further study, can not physically exist. Marshall McLuhan was more prophetic than he realized. There is no message. Only media.

Jim, I don't think this is brain-washing. It's a substitute for brain-food. We no longer spend time trying to think of great ideas. We spend time trying to parse the unparsable.

And then we wonder why our political systems look like such garbage. It only reflects the reality of the society around us all. I've had it with the "medium is the message" idiocracy. THE MESSAGE IS THE MESSAGE AND I DON'T CARE WHERE YOU FIND IT!

Jim,This is probably the most impactful and important blog you have written in the past few years. The very thought that citizens are being manipulated is gut wrenching. We must do anything and everything to fight that.

1. Are you engaged with the latest political campaigns and debates? YES.

2. Are you satisfied with how political campaigns are operating? NOT EVEN CLOSE.

3. Do you think politicians lie? Does that offend you? DOES A BEAR POOP IN THE WOODS?

4. What is your view of campaign funding? Is Super-PAC funding acceptable? SUPER PACS ARE ESSENTIALLY A SNEAKY WAY TO FUNNEL HIDDEN FUNDS IN ORDER TO MANIPULATE THE POPULATION. NOT ACCEPTABLE, BUT THE ELITE INSTITUTE THESE THINGS WITHOUT ASKING THE GRUNTS. I NOTICE THAT NONE OF THE CANDIDATES SERIOUSLY OBJECT... EVEN BERNIE, WHO DISAVOWED THEM, BUT STILL BENEFITS FROM THEM... GRIN...

5. Have you contributed to any politician online? NO.

6. Do you watch political advertising on TV? How does it affect your opinions? IT REMINDS ME THAT EVERY STATEMENT IS A LIE, AND IT BOTHERS ME THAT MOST PEOPLE TAKE THE LIES AS TRUTH, AND VOTE ACCORDINGLY.

7. Are you engaged with social media for politics? How does it affect your view? NO. I READ AS MUCH AS I CAN AND TRY TO THINK FOR MYSELF, ALL THE WHILE SENSITIVE TO THE FACT THAT WHAT I READ HAS ALREADY BEEN FILTERED.

8. Do you think Google search is completely neutral? Could it be biased? IT WOULD BE EXTREMELY NAIVE TO BELIEVE THAT GOOGLE (AND OTHERS) WOULD NOT USE AND ABUSE INFORMATION TO BENEFIT ITSELF OR ITS SUPPORTERS.

1. Are you engaged with the latest political campaigns and debates? NO

2. Are you satisfied with how political campaigns are operating? I don't really know.

3. Do you think politicians lie? Does that offend you? Maybe they don't mean to, but they don't always do what they say. Yes. I thought Obama would get out of Iraq and Afghanistan and close Guantanamo.

4. What is your view of campaign funding? Is Super-PAC funding acceptable? Don't know. It makes my contribution less meaningful.

5. Have you contributed to any politician online? NO

6. Do you watch political advertising on TV? Does it affect your opinions? NO

7. Do you use social media for politics? Does it affect your views? NO

8. Do you think Google search is completely neutral? Could it be biased? Don't know.

1.Are you engaged with the latest political campaigns and debates? No2.Are you satisfied with how political campaigns are operating? No, hence my lack of engagement.3.Do you think politicians lie? Does that offend you? Yes. Does it offend? It is expected. So whether or not I'm offended by the expected seems irrelevant. 4.What is your view of campaign funding? Is Super-PAC funding acceptable? It is over-the-top ridiculous. Think of all the other things that could be done with all that money? It's a waste. 5.Have you contributed to any politician online? No.6.Do you watch political advertising on TV? How does it affect your opinions? No. I don't watch much TV. If I happen to see an ad, I change the channel. It only furthers my disgust of politics. 7.Are you engaged with social media for politics? How does it affect your view? No.8.Do you think Google search is completely neutral? Could it be biased? Good question. I don't go a day without googling something. Hadn't considered Google holding the power to customize findings.

1. Are you engaged with the latest political campaigns and debates?Much more than usual = very much due to the rise of the extremes.

2. Are you satisfied with how political campaigns are operating?

It seems like especially the Republican party has been hijacked...the level of the debate is a disgrace on a global scale

3. Do you think politicians lie? Does that offend you?It appears to me that there is a candidate in the running that claims he's not a politician, but seems to factually lie the most...without much consequence. Politicians hardly lie, they just have a different perspective of the truth that might change over time.

4. What is your view of campaign funding? Is Super-PAC funding acceptable?This is a travesty and not acceptable....reminds me of the later times in Rome when many positions went to the highest bidder.

5. Have you contributed to any politician online?Not after learning that individual contributions amount to 1-2%...the rest come from the 1%

6. Do you watch political advertising on TV? Does it affect your opinions?Some...not much of an effect

7. Do you use social media for politics? Does it affect your views?Some...more than the adds

8. Do you think Google search is completely neutral? Could it be biased?Certainly could be biased.

This post reminds of conversations my family had at the dinner table while I was growing up. I guess I was fortunate to have a family with varied Geo-Political views.The family consisted of people from all walks of life, farmers, businessman, mill workers, public service workers, etc... My parents instilled in me a passion to always listen, always consider other points of view. They also insisted that I research and understand before forming my own point of view. This process had its own set of rules to follow, always be suspicious and always question; the purpose, the motive, and the goal desired to be achieved. Father instilled in me the fact that data can be manipulated, bent and distorted to achieve any desired goal. In other words I was told not to believe everything that is written, or said. Depending upon a specific point of view the information conveyed may not tell the whole story.

1.Are you engaged with the latest political campaigns and debates? My wife and I view and discuss the Debates from both parties. We are disappointed in Rude and disrespectful nature of the Republicans. The Democratic party race is a race for the best sound bite, repeat sound bite again, maybe repeating an additional three or four times.2.Are you satisfied with how political campaigns are operating? No, disinformation, incomplete and misinformation, are the most commonly used weapons. There must be a better way to relay important information.3.Do you think politicians lie? Does that offend you? There is a little larceny in everyone, unfortunately. This does not offend me because, I do not take information at face value.4.What is your view of campaign funding? Is Super-PAC funding acceptable? I am not a fan of our current funding models. The models make it a contest of who has the funding to continue advertising and promoting. In a perfect world spending would be limited, forcing everyone onto an equal platform, no need for SUPER-PACS.5.Have you contributed to any politician online? No6.Do you watch political advertising on TV? How does it affect your opinions? My usual response is the opposite of the desired reaction, I question the validity of the position.7.Are you engaged with social media for politics? How does it affect your view? Yes, I follow the social media, I do not accept everything as truthful or accurate.8.Do you think Google search is completely neutral? Could it be biased? As I Mr. Pinto pointed out so well, everyone has a bias, based upon the many social and economical factors they faced during there life's. Google is man made, the code behind Google will always have a bias. Information can be used to prove and disprove ideas depending upon the question asked.

Media:As I remember, growing up in the 60's and 70' News writers and News Broadcasters attempted to remain neutral in points of view, providing as much information as possible in 30 seconds, attempting to not influence decisions but to be a conduit of information. I will kid myself or you, every story always had a bias.

In closing I want to say, I am an average citizen, not paranoid, not into conspiracy theories. I wish more people would fact check for themselves, and form there own unique opinions. I worry about voter apathy, and I wonder how our society might be better off if 90% of people eligible to vote actually voted.

Advertising is misleading, just because someone calls it a sale, or fantastic value, does not mean it is. It is up to the consumer to have access to data to determine Value

This posts has brought up many points I agree with, we should question, we should as individuals investigate, and form our own unique positions.

1. Are you engaged with the latest political campaigns and debates? Yes

2. Are you satisfied with how political campaigns are operating? NO!

3. Do you think politicians lie? Yes, I know they do — constantly — and the media repeats their lies as facts.

Does that offend you? Yes, profoundly!

4. What is your view of campaign funding?It should be a nominal contribution collected via income tax and limited to a fixed amount for each elected office.

Is Super-PAC funding acceptable? No, these are just a way for wealthy individuals and organizations to “buy” elections

5. Have you contributed to any politician online? Yes

6. Do you watch political advertising on TV? Not if I can help it!

Does it affect your opinions? Yes, but mainly negatively b/c it’s mostly negative advertising, which I think should be illegal. (Tell me what YOU believe in and what YOU will do if elected, and I’ll do my own due diligence on the other candidates!)

7. Do you use social media for politics? No, absolutely not!

Does it affect your views? NO! SM is 98% BS that I don’t care about at all. What is ’trending’ (a word that I despise!) in my area is of ZERO interest to me. (IMO, paying any serious attention to what is “trending” has a sheep-like connotation.)

Could it be biased? Yes, of course. They know where their money comes from, just as any astute business does, and you can bet that they will optimize around it — and whether they do so deliberately or inherently, there is going to be some level of prejudicial influence.

1.Are you engaged with the latest political campaigns and debates? YES

2.Are you satisfied with how political campaigns are operating? NO

3.Do you think politicians lie? YESDoes that offend you? YES

4.What is your view of campaign funding? Is Super-PAC funding acceptable? Eliminate Super-PACs! Limit contributions to voting citizens, and limit the amount any one citizen can give to something like $1. per day.

5.Have you contributed to any politician online? NO, but I have visited a campaign office and donated there.

6.Do you watch political advertising on TV? How does it affect your opinions? NO.

7.Are you engaged with social media for politics? How does it affect your view? NO.

8.Do you think Google search is completely neutral? Could it be biased? It could be biased You also should ask opinion of media in general - it's almost all owned by something like 6 companies.

1. Are you engaged with the latest political campaigns and debates?I am not satisfied, ever since the SC allow corporation unlimited funds, it has changed everything.

2. Are you satisfied with how political campaigns are operating?No, they are set up to influence the media and corporate donor, the rest is irrelevant, the herd follows the money trail.

3. Do you think politicians lie? Does that offend you?Of course they lie, usually by omission, the two slants on the fiscal rescue package between the democrats in Michigan is classic. Some just lie 'cos that's what drives funding and that is the primary issue.

4. What is your view of campaign funding? Is Super-PAC funding acceptable?It's disgusting

5. Have you contributed to any politician online?No

6. Do you watch political advertising on TV? Does it affect your opinions?I try to ignore

7. Do you use social media for politics? Does it affect your views?No, delete without reading

8. Do you think Google search is completely neutral? Could it be biased?I hope Google is not biased but knowing the system, it probably is.....

That is very negative, certainly not the country I emigrated to fifty years ago, the politics have changed, for the worse...

My solution is to limit campaign funding to the salary of the office and tie the offices to a civil service rate . No changes except for COL, of course I am the only unbiased person so I should run it.....

Hi Jim - I came across this article that might interest you. I guess I'm what you would call a "single issue voter" and my issue has always been the national debt, which nobody seems to talk about much anymore. This is a 5-minute read, but I found the conclusion to be rather chilling. See what you think...http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikepatton/2014/10/28/who-owns-the-most-u-s-debt/

I am an "SEO" or Search Engine Optimize(r), ensuring AT&T's phones show up on Google. Before that I did the same thing at Disney. SO I might know a bit about this subject.

Answers to your Qs:1) Are you engaged with the latest political campaigns and debates?Yes. caucusing for Bernie this Saturday.2) Are you satisfied with how political campaigns are operating?Nope, see answer above.Do you think politicians lie? Does that offend you?3) Should we be offended at the sky when it rains? The lies result because they are not held accountable. Structures need to be implemented to punish liars. It doesn't help that a large number of voters support a serial liar...4) What is your view of campaign funding? Is Super-PAC funding acceptable?Have you contributed to any politician online?I have donated to Bernie and other causes. Support an amendment to remove Citizens United.5) Do you watch political advertising on TV? How does it affect your opinions?Don't watch TV6) Are you engaged with social media for politics? How does it affect your view?Very active on SocMed but see no advertising.7) Do you think Google search is completely neutral? Could it be biased?As far as I can see, they do a good job. The founders have resisted strong political pressure (China) that has ended up costing them billions. If they "tweaked" results, that would have to pass scrutiny of the legion of employees at Mountain View who'd likely know of it. An implementation problem, let's say. Having worked in gov't, I am skeptical of conspiracy theories that require the involvement of large numbers of complicit people.

You may want to watch the latest (4th) season of House of Cards - it incorporates a plot twist on this exact topic - The Underwoods use a private database to target sympathetic votes to pass legislation.